The New Alliance Party was the nation’s most successful “left” party during the period 1986-1993. It placed its presidential nominee on the ballot in all 50 states in 1988, and in 40 states in 1992. It qualified for over $900,000 in primary season matching funds in 1988, and $2,100,000 in 1992. It had offices, or candidates for local office, or both, in 36 states during those years. It elected a state legislator in Nebraska in 1988.

In U.S. history, no other “left” party had such success with ballot access as the New Alliance Party did in 1988. Even the Socialist Party never qualified for the government-printed ballot in all states, even in the party’s strongest decades, the 1900’s and 1910’s.

The New Alliance Party held itself out to the public as a party led by African-Americans, and this was certainly true, at least partially. Some criticis pooh-poohed that claim because the party’s leader was Fred Newman, who was white. Nevertheless, all of the party’s presidential candidates were African-Americans, as were many of its gubernatorial candidates. As a black-led party, the New Alliance Party worked especially hard to establish strength in southern states. It had many candidates for public office in the south. But there are three southern states in which the party never opened a campaign office or headquarters, and never had any candidates for public office (other than presidential elector). They were Arkansas, Florida, and Louisiana.

Louisiana had the top-two open primary for all offices, 1978 through 2006. Also, Louisiana had very discriminatory laws relating to party labels on the ballot during the years 1978 through 2004, the years the New Alliance Party was active. It appears that the Louisiana top-two system so discouraged the New Alliance Party from participating in Louisiana elections that the party simply did no organizing in that state. By contrast, the New Alliance Party had many strong campaigns in Texas and Mississippi, two states that border Louisiana.

The Virginia Board of Elections has said that the petition to place Constitution Party presidential nominee Virgil Goode on the ballot has enough valid signatures. The petition has more than twice as many signatures as are required.

However, the Virginia Republican Party has looked at the petition and asserts that it should be rejected. One basis for the Republican Party’s statement is that Virgil Goode himself got 3 signatures on one particular day on his own Virginia petition, yet the party claims it has proof he was physically in Alabama that same day. Goode was in Alabama part of that day, but he got home to Virginia and collected a few signatures that evening.

Another basis for the Republican Party’s claim is that one circulator collected approximately 250 signatures in one day. The Republican Party claims this is impossible. Actually, there are professional petition circulators who have collected as many as 600 or 700 signatures in one day. Some petitioners are very good, and when they are in a high-traffic location, they can collect more than 500 in a single day.

On September 1 (Saturday), the Ohio voters who challenged Gary Johnson’s placement on the general election ballot withdrew their challenge. They did not explain why they withdrew. Thanks to Gary Sinawski for this news.

In a slightly related development, on August 31, the U.S. Court of Appeals, 6th circuit, dismissed the Ohio legislature’s appeal of the 2011 U.S. District Court decision that put the Libertarian Party on the ballot for 2012. The 6th circuit said the case is moot.

Ohio has now been without a constitutional ballot access law for newly-qualifying parties for six full years. It will be interesting to see if the 2013 session of the legislature passes a valid law. According to 52 court precedents from around the country, petition deadlines as early as March are unconstitutional. Yet in all six years, there has been no bill introduced in the Ohio legislature to set a petition deadline for newly-qualifying parties that would be upheld. The only reasonable solution is to eliminate the requirement that newly-qualifying parties must nominate by primary. Very few other states requires that newly-qualifying parties must nominate by primary, as a condition of having their nominees on the general election ballot with the party label. Ohio has a strong preference for an early primary, especially in presidential election years. If Ohio were willing to hold its congressional/state office primary in the late summer, the problem would be easier to solve, but given the state preference for an early primary, the state needs to exempt newly-qualifying parties from having a primary.